QUOTE(Moulton @ Sat 24th May 2008, 4:14am)
Guettarda clarifies the filth...
QUOTE(Guettarda on Moulton's talk page)
No, not youNo, I wasn't referring to you. I meant all the things they have said about people like Slim Virgin. I don't think you're making sense, but I wouldn't call what you had to say "filth". Guettarda (talk) 02:51, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
As far as I know, I haven't said anything to or about SV, as I've never had occasion to encounter her in the pages of Wikipedia. Her backstory may be of interest to some but it holds no fascination or thrall for me. —Moulton (talk) 03:09, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
One wonders who the "they" are in that case. And what "they" said about SlimVirgin that means they are filth.
I'll go on record and say that SlimVirgin was outrageously manipulative, and debased the Wikipedia project from 2005 onwards via excessive gaming, lying, bullying and other damaging methods. She played a big part in the site's rapid deterioration towards an arena where rampant oligarchies used WPs status on google as a real world weapon against political rivals. SlimVirgin was a poster child for a lot of what had gone wrong with WP. Most people who follow Wikipedia closely would agree with that assessment, I think.
If pointing that out makes people "filth" in the eyes of people that continue to behave in the same outrageous manner, as this crowd have done over the Picard article, then that is no surprise.